This is a huge bonfire:
The Link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028380818The OP:
eniwetok (545 posts)
Should California Threaten Secession To Abolish Electoral College?
Last edited Mon Dec 19, 2016, 08:56 PM - Edit history (1)
PROBLEM 1: The standard for morally legitimate government was best summed up in the Declaration Of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
The Electoral College system now twice in 16 years has imposed on the nation a president who was REJECTED by the People. The EC makes a mockery of the very concept of self-determination. Like Bush2, Trump will do immense damage to the nation and further entrench the power of a toxic GOP into the fabric of government.
PROBLEM 2: The EC is unlikely to ever be abolished constitutionally. The GOP has a well documented contempt for democracy and now that the EC has a clear GOP bias, no proposed amendment will ever get out of Congress. In the Senate a mere 18% of the US population gets 52% of the seats.
PROBLEM 3: Even if a proposed amendment made it out of Congress... states with as little as 4% of the US population can block any reform. The Popular Vote interstate pact is a clever workaround but it is unlikely to ever become reality and the first time a state has to vote against its own election results, there will be a revolt in that state to leave the pact. The only solution is to abolish the EC not put bandaids over it.
QUESTION: How do citizens reform a system that is both antidemocratic and virtually reformproof? One can imagine a 50-100 year campaign to overcome all the obstacles. But how many more morally illegitimate presidents will be imposed on the nation in that time determined to make reform more difficult?
PROPOSAL: I can think of no way to reform the system internally. If you can... I'd like to hear it. The only way I can envision the EC being abolished is if a state like California threatens secession unless democratic reforms are made to the Constitution... thus creating a constitutional crisis.
Okay...
rusty fender (1,499 posts)
1. I totally agree with you
So do I. Let them go. Wave bye, bye.
Calculating (563 posts)
2. Yes
Beats living under the tyranny of the minority. Trump and company haven't shown even an ounce of bipartisanship or compromise despite losing by the popular vote. Rather than trying to heal the divide, they've ripped it open wider and poured salt in. We have a government full of bigots, science denying morons, and old white billionaires now. These people are NOT representative of the population and deserve little respect.
The founders set our country up with a rigged system, which was also rigged to be unfixable because those it benefits would need to vote to repeal it.
Butthurt loser.
eniwetok (545 posts)
4. The EC was created to benefit whites in slave states.
For a while I'd considered Hamilton's arguments in Federalist 68 to be the reason for the EC. But after much reflection I think it was designed to conceal the reason for creating an antidemocratic method of electing presidents . The real reason can be found in the minutes of the so-called Constitutional Convention. Here's Madison on July 19th 1787. He says the popular vote is best but there's a problem with it...
MADISON: The people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself. It would be as likely as any that could be devised to produce an Executive Magistrate of distinguished Character. The people generally could only know & vote for some Citizen whose merits had rendered him an object of general attention & esteem. There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_719.asp
Slave states caused hillary to lose!!!
malchickiwick (141 posts)
3. What happens to Camp Pendleton? Vandenberg? Yosemite? Redwoods?
Secession is ripe with its own set of problems. Just ask the folks at Fort Sumter....
Better watch it mole. Dummies don't like logic in their secedemas.
eniwetok (545 posts)
6. Please Note... I said THREATEN Secession... n/a
And what happens when Trump and congress says: "See ya!"
malchickiwick (141 posts)
7. Wouldn't you have to answer those Qs to have said threat taken seriously??
Quit pissing on his secedemas parade!!
WillowTree This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to eniwetok (Reply #6)
Mon Dec 19, 2016, 12:28 PM
Star Member WillowTree (4,000 posts)
14. So.......what? You're suggesting an empty threat that you don't intend to follow through on?
What possible good would that do?
Wait for it....
eniwetok (545 posts)
29. why would it be empty...
Look... I don't see why you're having problems with this. Secession is... we're gone. If you reform the Constitution... we'll come back.
A THREAT is all measures short of actual secession. But obviously the People of have to be willing to secede if they're not treated with respect. This can NOT be an empty threat.
OK... you don't like this idea... and your idea... drum roll.... for abolishing the EC is????
QUIT PISSING ON MY SECEDEMAS!!!!
WillowTree (4,000 posts)
36. My Dear Old Dad taught me never to threaten.
Just go ahead with your action. You don't threaten to quit your job, you quit. They can try to talk you back and you may agree to, but that would be after the fact.
Threatening looks cheap. Your earlier response seemed to indicate that you were suggesting to just threaten to secede is all I was saying.
Having said that, we all thought it was silly when Texas was threatening secession and I don't necessarily think it's less so when it's a left-leaning state. But that's only my opinion.
Again with the logic.
Missn-Hitch (702 posts)
84. I didn't think Texas or the current OP is "silly".
Think of it like a divorce. We can do this without a bloody war.
North/South, East/West. Divide all assets and debts, people have two years to move to the area they want to live in.
To make it easy: One side will be led by the Obamas, Clintons, Warren, Sanders. The other side will be Trump, Pence, Palin, Ryan.
Ready, set......GO!
Be careful what you ask for... you just may get it.
Hekate (39,908 posts)
115. You cannot be serious
He is.
Missn-Hitch (702 posts)
132. I am.
Told ya
sweetapogee (1,056 posts)
240. it is silly x 10
First of all, there is the above mentioned federal property. Then, while CA is a large state it would become a small country. It would need to fund it's Coast Guard, it's standing military, it would have to fund it's ports operational expenses, provide it's own border security, on and on.
Quit throwing logic on my secedemas!!!!
eniwetok (545 posts)
315. CA LOSES money to the federal government
While my intent is NOT to have CA leave... only to use its leverage to demand reforms... like most "blue" states, CA loses a large percentage of what it pays in federal taxes to other states... about 13%. In that 87% that IS sent back to CA... already includes those services you're referring to.
That means that if CA wasn't paying those taxes... CA could keep most of that money and repurpose it for for it's own needs.
I say most... because IF it came to true secession, there would be many accounts to be settled... such as CA's share of the national debt, what it's owed from the SS trust fund, etc.
But AGAIN, my intent is to leverage CA's power... and I suspect many other states would join in... to demand some commonsense reforms to the federal system that will never get changed otherwise.
Well.... bye!
brush (10,350 posts)
332. Not entirely silly. Think about it.
California's GNP is the sixth largest in the world. Its population is larger than many other countries, it grows its own food, has ports, manufacturing, infrastructure, financial exchanges, — it would be a complicated process that would take years and require negotiations as to how to handle government property, but it could make it.
And it would save all those funds send to the Feds that goes to support little states like Wyoming who get much stronger representation in the Electoral College than California.
Putting equalizing the EC or getting rid of it on the table would make everyone sit up and take notice of the urgency of a problem that need addressing.
Cut off their water and electricity from the US states and see how that works!!!
Marengo (1,865 posts)
39. Military installations are federal property, Washington isn't going to just let them go...
Were California to attempt succession, Washington would likely force reintegration through a military solution and I doubt the terms would be kind.
Liberals and mexicans gonna die en masse is what will happen.
eniwetok (545 posts)
81. the pure fantasy is all yours
The idea that there'd ever be a military conflict is laughable. California would have the moral highground and plenty of support from tens of millions around the nation. Should it actually come to secession, something that's highly doubtful... all your details could be negotiated.
From my OP... I ask AGAIN...
I can think of no way to reform the system internally. If you can... I'd like to hear it. The only way I can envision the EC being abolished is if a state like California threatens secession unless democratic reforms are made to the Constitution... thus creating a constitutional crisis.
That is all I am going to bring over. Way too many comments to post them all.
